CESAR QUIROGA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Essential Element Of A Crime cases and more on FLexlaw
KEHOE, Judge.
Appellant, defendant below, appeals a judgment of conviction and sentence entered pursuant to a jury verdict finding him guilty of carrying a concealed firearm. We reverse.
The sole ground for reversal in this case is that the record, at the conclusion of all the testimony, is wholly devoid of any evidence upon which the jury could have determined that the firearm was concealed. The only direct testimony in regard to the concealment of the firearm is that of appellant. There is no evidence to show any inconsistency with his testimony that the firearm was not concealed. Proof of concealment is an essential element of the crime of carrying a concealed firearm and such element must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Here the evidence before the jury was not susceptible of such proof. Donald v. State, 344 So. 2d 633 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Accordingly, the judgment and sentence of the trial court are reversed and the cause is remanded with directions that appellant be discharged.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (27 total)
-
Univ. OF Miami v. Bogorff, 583 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 1991)…methotrexate treatment, might not have been easily distinguishable from the effects of leukemia on his system. The knowledge required to commence the limitation period, however, does not rise to that of legal certainty. Steiner v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 364 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 373 So. 2d 461 (Fla.1979). Plaintiffs need only have notice, through the exercise of reasonable diligence, of the possible invasion of their legal rights. Nardone; Seaboard Air Line Railroad; City of Miami. The Bogo…
-
Elison v. Goodman, 395 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…tation grounds, because unequivocal statements in their depositions established that they were on notice of the defects more than four years before the action was filed. Section [*1202] 95.11(3), Florida Statutes (1979); Steiner v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 364 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 373 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1979). The judgment is affirmed, notwithstanding the filing of an affidavit in opposition to the summary judgment in which Mr. Elison directly contradicted his deposition testimony concerning th…
-
Tyson v. Viacom, Inc., 890 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…ss alone did no injpry to him. He could not be expected to anticipate his termination simply because his work environment was less than ideal. See Byington v. A.H. Robins Co., 580 F.Supp. 1513, 1515 (S.D.Fla.1984)(citing Steiner v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 364 So. 2d 47, 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978))(“the plaintiff is on notice only after she has suffered damage or injury (‘trauma’).”). Therefore, Tyson’s claim for fraud in the inducement did not accrue until November 25, 1996 when he suffered the injury of termination. T…
Previewing 3 of 27 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Donald v. State, 344 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)